A problem with the "Eddowes Shawl" DNA match

[Phil Carter]

Hello Chris, Mick,

What disturbs this writer is the neat side step quote from the publishers saying that in the scheme of things this "error" doesnt mean much.

Do I see a repitition of times gone by developing here? Yes. Disturbingly I do.

regards

Phil

[robhouse]

Interestingly, the Mail - which of course published the original "world exclusive" - has now picked up on the Independent story.

Claim that Jack the Ripper has been unmasked by DNA evidence as a Polish immigrant barber is WRONG, say experts
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...y-experts.html

Interesting to see how much one article can get wrong...

"experts say the mutation in question is actually 315.5C and not rare at all. It would have given a frequency of 1/29,000 at the time of Dr Louhelainen's analysis..."

I think if that was the only error, the science would still be correct. Journalism really is garbage these days. People write these articles with no understanding of what they are saying. And is it really 315.5 C Now? Did I miss something?

Also:

"Experts claim errors in the analysis of the DNA mean that claims sequences are linked to those of Catherine Eddowes (left), one of the Ripper's victims, and suspect Aaron Kosminski (right) are wrong"

As Chris has pointed out... the "experts" are not necessarily saying that the sequences linked to Kozminski are wrong. But we know almost nothing about the rarity of the Kozminski match, and it is not explained in the book.

I was always under the impression that the Eddowes match was said to be much stronger than the Kozminski match. Now that the Eddowes match is pretty much out the window, we are left with some vague, unexplained match to Kozminski's haplotype, which is nowhere near as rare a match as 314.1 C was said to be.

In any case, I am mainly just posting this since I am constantly amazed at how bad journalism is these days.

RH

[robhouse]

Well, I have always said that I do not think there was any deliberate fraud or deception by these two, but this is getting a bit disgusting at this point.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/jack-ripper-johnny-depp-tim-7947235

Seems Jari has time to be flying around to London, doing photo-shoots, etc. (And joking about who will play him in the film of their adventure! What rubbish).

So the whole "I am too busy with school work to respond" claim seems to be nonsense as well. These guys are digging themselves into a deeper and deeper hole.

I hope these 17 documentary companies have the sense to tell the whole story, and not just their packaged version.

RH

[Chris]

Interesting to see how much one article can get wrong...

"experts say the mutation in question is actually 315.5C and not rare at all. It would have given a frequency of 1/29,000 at the time of Dr Louhelainen's analysis..."

Which was in 2011, not 2013, according to the Mail.

Then again, this is the paper that brought us, only a couple of days ago "Yale student quarantined as Ebola outbreak spreads across the US".

I wonder why Edwards and Louhelainen chose to break the story in the Mail in the first place. Can it really be Sidgwick and Jackson's favourite newspaper?

[Robert]

"...some 800 million people in countries including the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and Israel have seen the story which involves this particular research.”

The 52-year-old adds: “That’s a fair percentage of the world’s population!”

But don't tell us the precise percentage, Jari.

[lynn cates]

precise percentage

Hello Robert.

"But don't tell us the precise percentage, Jari."

Well, by my calculations, 1/290,000 = .000003448 = .0003448%. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[mickreed]

In any case, I am mainly just posting this since I am constantly amazed at how bad journalism is these days.

RH

Yes Rob. There certainly is some rubbish about, and it's not all in RE's book.

On the other hand, some journalists do a worthwhile job, such as the bloke in the Independent who brought this stuff-up to the world's attention. I checked out his output for the last week, and there has been several articles on various science topics few, if any, of which he could have been expert in. So errors and superficialities are unsurprising.

What really pees me off is the lack of integrity of so many. The uncritical acceptance of things. That piece in the Liverpool Echo for example where the duo are quite explicitly said to have solved the mystery. A simple claimed to have solved would be all it takes to keep me quiet.

And yes, we can now see why JL was really too busy to respond to questions. All that time being made up for the camera leaves little time for owt else.

And as for the Mail. Their piece is just a rip off of the Independent without any acknowledgement at all. Now that is a surprise.

[mickreed]

I hope these 17 documentary companies have the sense to tell the whole story, and not just their packaged version.

RH

I wonder if there are 17 letters on the way saying 'Thanks, but no thanks'

[Caligo Umbrator]

I wonder if there are 17 letters on the way saying 'Thanks, but no thanks'

Hi Mickreed,

I believe, if such a film was produced, it could be a very revealing and human documentary, examining not just the surface of the events we are familiar with but also going deeper to reveal the machinery that drove the various parties involved.
Something along the lines of 'Overnight', the documentary about Troy Duffy - director of the movie 'The Boondock Saints', which cataloged his meteoric rise and fall in Hollywood.

Your, Caligo.

[RockySullivan]

Deleted

[Archaic]

Rocky, I think that remark was rude and inappropriate.

Personal attacks are not called for, nor are they permitted under existing policies. I hope Admin is around to remove your post.

It's unseemly and serves only to denigrate Casebook and the hard work of many Casebook members.

Best regards,
Archaic

[RockySullivan]

Rocky, I think that remark was rude and inappropriate.

Personal attacks are not called for, nor are they permitted under existing policies. I hope Admin is around to remove your post.

It's unseemly and serves only to denigrate Casebook and the hard work of many Casebook members.

Best regards,
Archaic

hi archaic, i removed my comment since it offended you. my apologies, it was only an observation...since jari plans on going hollywood...i vote meryl streep

[Archaic]

Thank you for understanding, Rocky.

Casebook is in the news for the excellent research and cooperation of its members, and I think we should conduct ourselves accordingly.

Let's stick to subjects like History and Science.

Best regards,
Archaic

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

Or just the end of the beginning?

Check this out.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/sc...internalSearch

Well, I'm away from my computer for a few days - and suddenly this issue hits the news and the pressure maybe on RE and the good doctor.

From The New Zealand Herald (with credit given to The Independent)

Serious DNS Error

And googling "serious DNA error" starts producing results that may not be good news for RE & Co.

cheers, gryff

[mickreed]

Thank you for understanding, Rocky.

Casebook is in the news for the excellent research and cooperation of its members, and I think we should conduct ourselves accordingly.

Let's stick to subjects like History and Science.

Best regards,
Archaic

Hi Archaic and Rocky

I tried to have discussions with someone who would have been very helpful in this debate. He refused to discuss it for several reasons. One of which was that Casebook was 'uncivilised and unprofessional'.